[Edit, 11 May 2009: Change 'bandwidth' to 'test capacity'. Sometimes the colloquial jargon we use at work translates imprecisely for a public audience.]

We were not able to issue a Dev channel release this week. Our test team did a great job in qualifying two Stable udpates and a Beta update this week, and we just didn't have the test capacity to push a Dev channel release.

We'll get an update out early next week. Stay tuned for some exciting new features we hope to land in the Dev channel.

What wouldn't I give for a couple of those "exciting new features" to include a completely revamped Download Manager and Bookmark Manager both akin to Firefox's.

As part of a revamped Download Manager, I still also really, really want Google Chrome to open certain downloads "on the fly" (or, to the temp folder) just like many of the other browsers open these downloads.

I actually just went back to the Google Chrome Beta because I've simply given up hope in seeing the abovementioned desired features anytime soon on the Dev Channel. Not to mention, I want more stability.

Regarding one of the potentially new features being add-on support, I totally understand the huge interest in it but am far more interested in the abovementioned features. Moreover, I have this feeling that add-ons/extensions will end up slowing down and/or weighing down Chrome. I sincerely hope that I am wrong about this feeling.

I absolutely love Chrome for the following reasons: speed, simplicity, security and stability (my "Four S's"). I hope Google continues to enhance each and every one of these fine aspects of Chrome!

Because publishing torrents is like asking for the RIAA to sue the grandmothers and children of Chrome users...

In seriousness though, google probably would shy away from using distributed publishing strategies like that when they already have datacenter-in-a-box's at the end of every strand of darkfibre they could get their hands on. There's just no way to control the user experience or speed of a download, and they can't yank it as easily when it's time for the next release.

Using bittorrent technology like that without considering those things is the kind of pandering to the audience that you'd expect from a company with a less pragmatic approach to user experience.

They were busy last week pushing some major updates to the stable and beta channels (over 200 changes) and weren't able to push a update to dev. If everything goes well we should see a update today, but if not remember the old adage: "Patience is a virtue." :P

all i want from google chrome is for it to be super speedy during start up and use as little of ram as possible. I ditched firefox because it got slow. so please... whatever you do, keep google chrome speedy and neat.

didn't anyone noticed the fact that the previous version was 2.0.177.1 while this one is 2.0.172.23 meanin 172 vs 177 meaning that the updater recognize 177 as newer then 172 and there for when i try to install 172 it doesn't work and if i uninstall 177and install 172 the updater is saying that there is a newer version(177)and by the way your feedback page have a problem with IE8 it doesn't work so well so please fix all this problem:)

i get that but if one have 177 installed he can't install 172 without uninstalling 177 and even then the browser show that there is an update at least if your on the dev channel so please think about it when you release new versions.